This year, the entire Christian world simultaneously celebrates the main holiday of the Church - the Resurrection of Christ. This again reminds us of the common root from which the main Christian denominations originate, of the once existing unity of all Christians. However, for almost a thousand years this unity has been broken between Eastern and Western Christianity. If many people are familiar with the date 1054 as the year officially recognized by historians as the year of the separation of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, then perhaps not everyone knows that it was preceded by a long process of gradual divergence.

In this publication, the reader is offered an abbreviated version of the article by Archimandrite Plakida (Dezey) "The History of a Schism". This is a brief study of the causes and history of the gap between Western and Eastern Christianity. Without examining dogmatic subtleties in detail, dwelling only on the sources of theological disagreements in the teachings of Blessed Augustine of Hippo, Father Plakida gives a historical and cultural overview of the events that preceded the mentioned date of 1054 and followed it. He shows that the division did not happen overnight or suddenly, but was the result of "a long historical process, which was influenced by both doctrinal differences and political and cultural factors."

The main translation work from the French original was carried out by students of the Sretensky Theological Seminary under the guidance of T.A. Shutova. Editorial correction and preparation of the text was carried out by V.G. Massalitina. The full text of the article is published on the website “Orthodox France. View from Russia".

Harbingers of a split

The teachings of bishops and ecclesiastical writers whose works were written in Latin, - Saints Hilary of Pictavia (315-367), Ambrose of Milan (340-397), Saint John Cassian the Roman (360-435) and many others - was completely in tune with the teaching of the Greek holy fathers: Saints Basil the Great (329-379), Gregory the Theologian (330-390), John Chrysostom (344-407) and others. The Western Fathers sometimes differed from the Eastern ones only in that they emphasized more on the moralizing component than on a deep theological analysis.

The first attempt on this doctrinal harmony occurred with the appearance of the teachings of Blessed Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430). Here we meet with one of the most disturbing mysteries of Christian history. In Blessed Augustine, to whom the feeling of the unity of the Church and love for it were inherent in the highest degree, there was nothing of a heresiarch. And yet, in many directions, Augustine opened up new paths for Christian thought, which left a deep imprint in the history of the West, but at the same time turned out to be almost completely alien to non-Latin Churches.

On the one hand, Augustine, the most "philosophizing" of the Fathers of the Church, is inclined to exalt the abilities of the human mind in the field of knowledge of God. He developed the theological doctrine of the Holy Trinity, which formed the basis of the Latin doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father. and Son(in Latin - filioque). According to more ancient tradition The Holy Spirit originates, just like the Son, only from the Father. The Eastern Fathers always adhered to this formula contained in the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament (see: John 15, 26), and saw in filioque distortion of the apostolic faith. They noted that as a result of this teaching in Western Church there was a certain belittling of the Hypostasis itself and the role of the Holy Spirit, which, in their opinion, led to a certain strengthening of the institutional and legal aspects in the life of the Church. From the 5th century filioque was universally allowed in the West, almost without the knowledge of the non-Latin Churches, but it was added to the Creed later.

As far as the inner life is concerned, Augustine emphasized human weakness and the omnipotence of Divine grace to such an extent that it appeared that he diminished human freedom in the face of Divine predestination.

Augustine's brilliant and highly attractive personality, even during his lifetime, was admired in the West, where he was soon considered the greatest of the Fathers of the Church and almost completely focused only on his school. To a large extent, Roman Catholicism and the Jansenism and Protestantism that splintered from it will differ from Orthodoxy in that which they owe to St. Augustine. Medieval conflicts between the priesthood and the empire, the introduction of the scholastic method in medieval universities, clericalism and anti-clericalism in Western society are in varying degrees and in different forms either a legacy or a consequence of Augustinism.

In the IV-V centuries. there is another disagreement between Rome and other Churches. For all the Churches of East and West, the primacy recognized for the Roman Church resulted, on the one hand, from the fact that she was the Church former capital empire, and on the other hand, from the fact that it was glorified by the preaching and martyrdom of the two supreme apostles Peter and Paul. But it's superior inter pares("between equals") did not mean that the Church of Rome was the seat of central government for the Universal Church.

However, starting from the second half of the 4th century, a different understanding was emerging in Rome. The Roman Church and its bishop demand for themselves a dominant authority that would make it the governing organ of the universal Church. According to Roman doctrine, this primacy is based on the clearly expressed will of Christ, who, in their opinion, gave this authority to Peter, saying to him: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16, 18). The Pope of Rome considered himself not just the successor of Peter, who has since been recognized as the first bishop of Rome, but also his vicar, in whom, as it were, the supreme apostle continues to live and through him to rule the Universal Church.

Despite some resistance, this position of primacy was gradually accepted by the whole West. The rest of the Churches generally adhered to the ancient understanding of primacy, often allowing some ambiguity in their relationship with the See of Rome.

Crisis in the Late Middle Ages

7th century witnessed the birth of Islam, which began to spread at lightning speed, which was facilitated by jihad- a holy war that allowed the Arabs to conquer the Persian Empire, which for a long time was a formidable rival of the Roman Empire, as well as the territories of the patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Starting from this period, the patriarchs of the cities mentioned were often forced to entrust the management of the remaining Christian flock to their representatives, who stayed on the ground, while they themselves had to live in Constantinople. As a result, there was a relative decrease in the importance of these patriarchs, and the patriarch of the capital of the empire, whose see already at the time of the Council of Chalcedon (451) was placed in second place after Rome, thus became, to some extent, the highest judge of the Churches of the East.

With the advent of the Isaurian dynasty (717), an iconoclastic crisis broke out (726). Emperors Leo III (717-741), Constantine V (741-775) and their successors forbade the depiction of Christ and the saints and the veneration of icons. Opponents of the imperial doctrine, mostly monks, were thrown into prison, tortured, and killed, as in the time of pagan emperors.

The popes supported the opponents of iconoclasm and broke off communication with the iconoclast emperors. And they, in response to this, annexed Calabria, Sicily and Illyria (the western part of the Balkans and northern Greece), which until that time were under the jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome, to the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

At the same time, in order to more successfully resist the offensive of the Arabs, the iconoclast emperors proclaimed themselves adherents of Greek patriotism, very far from the universalist "Roman" idea that had prevailed before, and lost interest in non-Greek areas of the empire, in particular, in northern and central Italy, claimed by the Lombards.

The legality of the veneration of icons was restored at the VII Ecumenical Council in Nicaea (787). After a new round of iconoclasm, which began in 813, Orthodox teaching finally triumphed in Constantinople in 843.

Communication between Rome and the empire was thus restored. But the fact that the iconoclast emperors limited their foreign policy interests to the Greek part of the empire led the popes to look for other patrons for themselves. Previously, the popes, who had no territorial sovereignty, were loyal subjects of the empire. Now, stung by the annexation of Illyria to Constantinople and left unprotected in the face of the invasion of the Lombards, they turned to the Franks and, to the detriment of the Merovingians, who had always maintained relations with Constantinople, began to contribute to the arrival of a new dynasty of Carolingians, bearers of other ambitions.

In 739, Pope Gregory III, seeking to prevent the Lombard king Luitprand from uniting Italy under his rule, turned to Major Charles Martel, who tried to use the death of Theodoric IV in order to eliminate the Merovingians. In exchange for his help, he promised to renounce all loyalty to the emperor of Constantinople and take advantage of the patronage exclusively of the king of the Franks. Gregory III was the last pope to ask the emperor for approval of his election. His successors will already be approved by the Frankish court.

Karl Martel could not justify the hopes of Gregory III. However, in 754, Pope Stephen II personally went to France to meet Pepin the Short. In 756, he conquered Ravenna from the Lombards, but instead of returning Constantinople, he handed it over to the pope, laying the foundation for the soon formed Papal States, which turned the popes into independent secular rulers. In order to give a legal justification for the current situation, a famous forgery was developed in Rome - the Gift of Constantine, according to which Emperor Constantine allegedly transferred imperial powers over the West to Pope Sylvester (314-335).

On September 25, 800, Pope Leo III, without any participation of Constantinople, laid the imperial crown on the head of Charlemagne and named him emperor. Neither Charlemagne, nor later other German emperors, who to some extent restored the empire he had created, became co-rulers of the Emperor of Constantinople, in accordance with the code adopted shortly after the death of Emperor Theodosius (395). Constantinople repeatedly proposed a compromise solution of this kind that would preserve the unity of Romagna. But the Carolingian Empire wanted to be the only legitimate Christian empire and sought to take the place of the Constantinopolitan Empire, considering it obsolete. That is why theologians from Charlemagne's entourage took the liberty of condemning the decrees of the 7th Ecumenical Council on the veneration of icons as tainted with idolatry and introducing filioque in the Nicene-Tsaregrad Creed. However, the popes soberly opposed these careless measures aimed at belittling the Greek faith.

However, the political break between the Frankish world and the papacy on the one hand and the ancient Roman Empire of Constantinople on the other was sealed. And such a break could not but lead to a proper religious schism, if we take into account the special theological significance that Christian thought attached to the unity of the empire, considering it as an expression of the unity of the people of God.

In the second half of the ninth century The antagonism between Rome and Constantinople manifested itself on a new basis: the question arose of what jurisdiction to include the Slavic peoples, who at that time were embarking on the path of Christianity. This new conflict also left a deep mark on the history of Europe.

At that time, Nicholas I (858-867) became pope, an energetic man who sought to establish the Roman concept of the dominance of the pope in the Universal Church, limit the interference of secular authorities in church affairs, and also fought against the centrifugal tendencies that manifested themselves in part of the Western episcopate. He backed up his actions with counterfeit decretals circulating shortly before, allegedly issued by previous popes.

In Constantinople, Photius (858-867 and 877-886) became patriarch. As modern historians have convincingly established, the personality of St. Photius and the events of the time of his reign were strongly vilified by his opponents. It was very educated person deeply devoted Orthodox faith, a zealous minister of the Church. He understood well what great importance has the enlightenment of the Slavs. It was on his initiative that Saints Cyril and Methodius went to enlighten the Great Moravian lands. Their mission in Moravia was eventually stifled and driven out by the intrigues of the German preachers. However, they managed to translate into Slavic liturgical and most important biblical texts, creating an alphabet for this, and thus laid the foundation for the culture of the Slavic lands. Photius was also involved in the education of the peoples of the Balkans and Russia. In 864 he baptized Boris, Prince of Bulgaria.

But Boris, disappointed that he did not receive from Constantinople an autonomous church hierarchy for his people, turned for a while to Rome, receiving Latin missionaries. It became known to Photius that they preach the Latin doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit and seem to use the Creed with the addition filioque.

At the same time, Pope Nicholas I intervened in the internal affairs of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, seeking the removal of Photius, in order to restore the former Patriarch Ignatius, who was deposed in 861, to the throne with the help of church intrigues. In response to this, Emperor Michael III and Saint Photius convened a council in Constantinople (867) , whose regulations were subsequently destroyed. This council, apparently, recognized the doctrine of filioque heretical, declared unlawful the intervention of the pope in the affairs of the Church of Constantinople and severed liturgical communion with him. And since Western bishops complained to Constantinople about the "tyranny" of Nicholas I, the council proposed to Emperor Louis the German to depose the pope.

As a result palace coup Photius was deposed, and a new council (869-870), convened in Constantinople, condemned him. This cathedral is still considered in the West the VIII Ecumenical Council. Then, under Emperor Basil I, Saint Photius was returned from disgrace. In 879, a council was again convened in Constantinople, which, in the presence of the legates of the new pope John VIII (872-882), restored Photius to the throne. At the same time, concessions were made regarding Bulgaria, which returned to the jurisdiction of Rome, while retaining the Greek clergy. However, Bulgaria soon achieved ecclesiastical independence and remained in the orbit of Constantinople's interests. Pope John VIII wrote a letter to Patriarch Photius condemning the addition filioque into the Creed, without condemning the doctrine itself. Photius, probably not noticing this subtlety, decided that he had won. Contrary to persistent misconceptions, it can be argued that there was no so-called second Photius schism, and liturgical communion between Rome and Constantinople continued for more than a century.

Gap in the 11th century

11th century for Byzantine Empire was truly golden. The power of the Arabs was finally undermined, Antioch returned to the empire, a little more - and Jerusalem would have been liberated. The Bulgarian Tsar Simeon (893-927), who was trying to create a Romano-Bulgarian empire that was beneficial to him, was defeated, the same fate befell Samuil, who raised an uprising to form a Macedonian state, after which Bulgaria returned to the empire. Kievan Rus, having adopted Christianity, quickly became part of the Byzantine civilization. The rapid cultural and spiritual upsurge that began immediately after the triumph of Orthodoxy in 843 was accompanied by the political and economic flourishing of the empire.

Oddly enough, the victories of Byzantium, including over Islam, were also beneficial to the West, creating favorable conditions for the emergence of Western Europe in the form in which it would exist for many centuries. And the starting point of this process can be considered the formation in 962 of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation and in 987 - France of the Capetians. Nevertheless, it was in the 11th century, which seemed so promising, that a spiritual rupture occurred between the new Western world and the Roman Empire of Constantinople, an irreparable split, the consequences of which were tragic for Europe.

From the beginning of the XI century. the name of the pope was no longer mentioned in the diptychs of Constantinople, which meant that communication with him was interrupted. This is the completion of the long process we are studying. It is not known exactly what served direct cause this gap. Perhaps the reason was the inclusion filioque in the confession of faith sent by Pope Sergius IV to Constantinople in 1009 along with the notice of his accession to the throne of Rome. Be that as it may, but during the coronation of the German emperor Henry II (1014), the Creed was sung in Rome with filioque.

In addition to the introduction filioque there were also a number of Latin customs that revolted the Byzantines and increased the occasion for disagreement. Among them, the use of unleavened bread for the celebration of the Eucharist was especially serious. If in the first centuries leavened bread was used everywhere, then from the 7th-8th centuries the Eucharist began to be celebrated in the West using wafers of unleavened bread, that is, without leaven, as the ancient Jews did on their Passover. Symbolic language was of great importance at that time, which is why the use of unleavened bread by the Greeks was perceived as a return to Judaism. They saw in this a denial of that novelty and that spiritual nature of the Savior's sacrifice, which were offered by Him instead of the Old Testament rites. In their eyes, the use of "dead" bread meant that the Savior in the incarnation received only human body but not the soul...

In the XI century. from greater strength the strengthening of papal power continued, which began during the time of Pope Nicholas I. The fact is that in the 10th century. the power of the papacy was weakened as never before, being the victim of the actions of various factions of the Roman aristocracy or being pressured by the German emperors. Various abuses spread in the Roman Church: the sale of church positions and the award of them by the laity, marriages or cohabitation among the priesthood ... But during the pontificate of Leo XI (1047-1054), a real reform of the Western Church began. The new pope surrounded himself with worthy people, mostly natives of Lorraine, among whom stood out Cardinal Humbert, Bishop of White Silva. The reformers saw no other means to remedy the disastrous state of Latin Christianity than to increase the power and authority of the pope. In their view, the papal power, as they understood it, should extend to the universal Church, both Latin and Greek.

In 1054, an event occurred that might have remained insignificant, but served as a pretext for a dramatic clash between the ecclesiastical tradition of Constantinople and the Western reformist movement.

In an effort to get help from the pope in the face of the threat of the Normans, who encroached on the Byzantine possessions of southern Italy, Emperor Constantine Monomachus, at the instigation of the Latin Argyrus, who was appointed by him as the ruler of these possessions, took a conciliatory position towards Rome and wished to restore unity, interrupted, as we saw, at the beginning of the century . But the actions of the Latin reformers in southern Italy, infringing on the Byzantine religious customs, worried the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cirularius. The papal legates, among whom was the adamant Bishop of White Silva, Cardinal Humbert, who arrived in Constantinople for negotiations on unification, planned to remove the intractable patriarch by the hands of the emperor. The matter ended with the legates placing a bull on the throne of Hagia Sophia excommunicating Michael Cirularius and his supporters. And a few days later, in response to this, the patriarch and the council he convened excommunicated the legates themselves from the Church.

Two circumstances gave the hasty and thoughtless act of the legates a significance that they could not appreciate at that time. First, they again raised the issue of filioque, wrongfully reproaching the Greeks for excluding it from the Creed, although non-Latin Christianity has always regarded this teaching as contrary to the apostolic tradition. In addition, the Byzantines became clear about the plans of the reformers to extend the absolute and direct authority of the pope to all bishops and believers, even in Constantinople itself. Presented in this form, ecclesiology seemed completely new to them and also could not but contradict the apostolic tradition in their eyes. Having familiarized themselves with the situation, the rest of the eastern patriarchs joined the position of Constantinople.

1054 should be seen less as the date of the split than as the year of the first failed attempt at reunification. No one then could have imagined that the division that occurred between those Churches that would soon be called Orthodox and Roman Catholic would last for centuries.

After the split

The schism was based mainly on doctrinal factors concerning different views about the mystery of the Holy Trinity and about the structure of the Church. Differences were also added to them in less important matters relating to church customs and rituals.

During the Middle Ages, the Latin West continued to develop in a direction that further removed it from the Orthodox world and its spirit.<…>

On the other hand, there were serious events that further complicated the understanding between the Orthodox peoples and the Latin West. Probably the most tragic of them was the IV Crusade, which deviated from the main path and ended with the ruin of Constantinople, the proclamation of the Latin emperor and the establishment of the rule of the Frankish lords, who arbitrarily cut the land holdings of the former Roman Empire. Many Orthodox monks were expelled from their monasteries and replaced by Latin monks. All this probably happened unintentionally, yet this turn of events was a logical consequence of the creation of the western empire and the evolution of the Latin Church since the beginning of the Middle Ages.<…>

The difference between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church lies primarily in the recognition of the infallibility and supremacy of the Pope. The disciples and followers of Jesus Christ after His Resurrection and Ascension began to call themselves Christians. This is how Christianity arose, which gradually spread to the west and east.

The history of the split of the Christian church

As a result of reformist views over the course of 2000 years, different currents of Christianity have arisen:

• orthodoxy;
• Catholicism;
• Protestantism, which arose as an offshoot of the Catholic faith.

Each religion subsequently breaks up into new confessions.

In Orthodoxy, Greek, Russian, Georgian, Serbian, Ukrainian and other patriarchates arise, which have their own branches. Catholics are divided into Roman and Greek Catholics. It is difficult to list all confessions in Protestantism.

All these religions are united by one root - Christ and faith in the Holy Trinity.

Read about other religions:

The Holy Trinity

The Roman Church was founded by the Apostle Peter, who spent time in Rome last days. Even then, the Pope headed the church, in translation meaning "Our Father." At that time, few priests were ready to take over the leadership of Christianity because of the fear of persecution.

Eastern Rite Christianity was led by four oldest Churches:

• Constantinople, whose patriarch headed the eastern branch;
• Alexandria;
• Jerusalem, whose first patriarch was the earthly brother of Jesus, James;
• Antioch.

Thanks to the educational mission of the Eastern priesthood, Christians from Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania joined them in the 4th-5th centuries. Subsequently, these countries declared themselves autocephalous, independent of the Orthodox movement.

On a purely human level, the newly formed churches began to develop their own visions of development, rivalries arose that intensified after Constantine the Great named Constantinople the capital of the empire in the fourth century.

After the fall of the power of Rome, all supremacy passed to the Patriarch of Constantinople, which caused dissatisfaction with the Western Rite, headed by the Pope.

Western Christians justified their right to supremacy by the fact that it was in Rome that the Apostle Peter lived and was executed, to whom the Savior handed over the keys to paradise.

St. Peter

Filioque

The differences between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox also relate to the filioque, the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit, which became the root cause of the split of the Christian united Church.

Christian theologians more than a thousand years ago did not come to a general conclusion about the procession of the Holy Spirit. The question is who sends the Spirit - God the Father or God the Son.

The Apostle John conveys (John 15:26) that Jesus will send the Comforter in the form of the Spirit of truth, proceeding from God the Father. In the epistle to the Galatians, the apostle Paul directly confirms the procession of the Spirit from Jesus, who blows the Holy Spirit into the hearts of Christians.

According to the Nicene formula, belief in the Holy Spirit sounds like an appeal to one of the hypostases of the Holy Trinity.

The Fathers of the Second Ecumenical Council expanded this appeal “I believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Life-giving, who proceeds from the Father”, emphasizing the role of the Son, which was not accepted by the Constantinopolitan priests.

The naming of Photius as the Ecumenical Patriarch was perceived by the Roman rite as a belittling of their significance. Eastern worshipers pointed to the ugliness of Western priests, who shaved their beards and observed fasts on Saturday, at that time they themselves began to surround themselves with special luxury.

All these disagreements gathered drop by drop to express themselves in a huge explosion of the schema.

The Patriarchy, headed by Nikita Stifat, openly calls the Latins heretics. The final straw that led to the break was the humiliation of the delegation of legates at the negotiations in 1054 in Constantinople.

Interesting! Not found general concept in matters of government, the priests were divided into the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. Initially christian churches called orthodox. After the partition, the eastern Christian movement retained the name of orthodoxy or Orthodoxy, while the western direction became known as Catholicism or the universal Church.

Differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism

1. In recognition of the infallibility and primacy of the Pope and in relation to the filioque.
2. Orthodox canons deny purgatory, where, having sinned with a not very serious sin, the soul is cleansed and sent to paradise. In Orthodoxy there are no major or minor sins, sin is sin, and it can be cleansed only by the sacrament of confession during the life of a sinner.
3. Catholics came up with indulgences that give a “pass” to Heaven for good deeds, but the Bible says that salvation is a grace from God, and without true faith you won’t earn a place in paradise with good deeds alone. (Eph. 8:2-9)

Orthodoxy and Catholicism: similarities and differences

Differences in rituals

The two religions differ in the calendar of worship services. Catholics live according to the Gregorian calendar, Orthodox - Julian. According to the Gregorian chronology, Jewish and Orthodox Easter can coincide, which is prohibited. According to the Julian calendar, Russian, Georgian, Ukrainian, Serbian and Jerusalem Orthodox Churches conduct divine services.

There are also differences when writing icons. In the Orthodox ministry, this is a two-dimensional image; Catholicism practices naturalistic dimensions.

Eastern Christians have the opportunity to divorce and get married a second time, in the Western rite divorces are prohibited.

The Byzantine rite of Great Lent begins on Monday, while the Latin rite begins on Wednesday.

Orthodox Christians make the sign of the cross from right to left, folding their fingers in a certain way, while Catholics do it the other way around, not focusing on the hands.

An interesting interpretation of this action. Both religions agree that a demon sits on the left shoulder, and an angel sits on the right.

Important! Catholics explain the direction of baptism by the fact that when the cross is applied, there is a cleansing from sin to salvation. According to Orthodoxy, at baptism, a Christian proclaims the victory of God over the devil.

How do Christians who were once in unity treat each other? Orthodoxy does not have liturgical communion with Catholics, joint prayers.

Orthodox churches do not rule over secular authorities; Catholicism affirms the supremacy of God and the subordination of authorities to the Pope.

According to the Latin rite, any sin offends God, Orthodoxy claims that God cannot be offended. He is not mortal; by sin, a person harms only himself.

Daily life: rituals and services

Sayings of the Saints on Division and Unity

There are many differences between Christians of both rites, but the main thing that unites them is the Holy Blood of Jesus Christ, faith in the One God and the Holy Trinity.

St. Luke of Crimea quite sharply condemned the negative attitude towards Catholics, while separating the Vatican, the Pope and the cardinals from ordinary people who have true, saving faith.

St. Philaret of Moscow compared the division between Christians with partitions, while emphasizing that they could not reach the sky. According to Filaret, Christians cannot be called heretics if they believe in Jesus as the Savior. The saint constantly prayed for the union of all. He recognized Orthodoxy as the true teaching, but pointed out that God also accepts other Christian movements with longsuffering.

Saint Mark of Ephesus calls Catholics heretics, since they have deviated from the true faith, and urged them not to make peace.

The Monk Ambrose of Optina also condemns the Latin rite for violating the decrees of the apostles.

Righteous John of Kronstadt claims that Catholics, along with reformers, Protestants and Lutherans, have fallen away from Christ, based on the words of the Gospel. (Matthew 12:30)

How to measure the value of faith in this or that rite, the truth of accepting God the Father and walking under the power of the Holy Spirit in love for God the Son, Jesus Christ? God will show all this in the future.

Video about the difference between Orthodoxy and Catholicism? Andrey Kuraev

Nika Kravchuk

How is the Orthodox Church different from the Catholic

Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church, two branches of Christianity. Both originate from the preaching of Christ and apostolic times, honor the Most Holy Trinity, worship the Mother of God and the saints, have the same sacraments. But there are many differences between these churches.

The most fundamental dogmatic differences, Perhaps there are three.

Symbol of faith. The Orthodox Church teaches that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father. The Catholic Church has the so-called "filioque" - the addition of "and the Son." That is, Catholics claim that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son.

Honoring the Mother of God. Catholics have a dogma about the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, according to which the Mother of God did not inherit original sin. The Orthodox Church says that Mary was freed from original sin from the moment of the conception of Christ. Catholics also believe that the Mother of God ascended to heaven, so they do not know such a revered holiday in Orthodoxy of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

The dogma of the infallibility of the Pope. The Catholic Church believes that the teaching on matters of faith and morality delivered by the Pope ex cathedra (from the pulpit) is infallible. The Pope is filled with the Holy Spirit, so he cannot make mistakes.

But there are many other differences as well.

Celibacy. In the Orthodox Church there are black and white clergy, the second one is supposed to have families. The Catholic clergy take a vow of celibacy - celibacy.

Marriage. The Catholic Church considers it a sacred union and does not recognize divorce. Orthodoxy allows different circumstances.

Cross sign. Orthodox are baptized with three fingers, from left to right. Catholics - five and from right to left.

Baptism. If in the Catholic Church it is supposed only to water the person being baptized with water, then in the Orthodox Church - to dip with his head. In Orthodoxy, the sacraments of baptism and chrismation are performed at the same moment, while among Catholics, chrismation is performed separately (possibly on the day of the First Communion).

Communion. Orthodox during this sacrament eat bread from leavened dough, and Catholics - from unleavened bread. In addition, the Orthodox Church blesses children to receive communion from a very early age, and in Catholicism this is preceded by catechesis (teaching the Christian faith), after which there is a big holiday - the First Communion, which falls somewhere in the 10-12th year of a child's life.

Purgatory. The Catholic Church, in addition to hell and heaven, also recognizes a special intermediate place in which the soul of a person can still be cleansed for eternal bliss.

Temple arrangement. In Catholic churches, an organ is installed, there are relatively fewer icons, but there are still sculptures and many places to sit. In Orthodox churches there are many icons, murals, it is customary to pray while standing (there are benches and chairs for those who need to sit).

Universality. Each of the Churches has its own understanding of universality (catholicity). Orthodox believe that the Universal Church is embodied in each local Church, headed by a bishop. The Catholics specify that this local Church must have communion with the local Roman Catholic Church.

Cathedrals. The Orthodox Church recognizes these Ecumenical Councils, while the Catholic Church recognizes 21.

Many are concerned about the question: can both churches unite? There is such an opportunity, but what about the differences that have existed for many centuries? The question remains open.

Take it, tell your friends!

Read also on our website:

show more

When people first come to the temple, the text of the services seems completely incomprehensible to them. “Elitsya catechumens, come out,” the priest gives an exclamation. Who does he mean? Where to go? Where did such a name come from? The answers to these questions must be sought in the history of the Church.

Orthodoxy differs from Catholicism, but not everyone will answer the question of what exactly these differences are. There are differences between the churches both in symbolism, and in the ritual, and in the dogmatic part ... What main differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism ?

First outward difference Catholic and Orthodox symbolism concerns the image of the cross and the crucifix. If in the early Christian tradition there were 16 types of cross shapes, today the traditionally four-sided cross is associated with Catholicism, and the eight-pointed or six-pointed cross with Orthodoxy.

The words on the tablet on the crosses are the same, only the languages ​​\u200b\u200bare different, in which the inscription “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. In Catholicism, this is Latin: INRI. In some Eastern churches, the Greek abbreviation INBI is used from the Greek text Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος ὁ Bασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων.

The Romanian Orthodox Church uses the Latin version, and in Russian and Church Slavonic versions, the abbreviation looks like I.Н.Ц.I.

Interestingly, this spelling was approved in Russia only after Nikon's reform, before that, "King of Glory" was often written on the tablet. This spelling was preserved by the Old Believers.

The number of nails often also differs on Orthodox and Catholic crucifixes. Catholics have three, Orthodox have four.

The most fundamental difference between the symbolism of the cross in the two churches is that on the Catholic cross Christ is depicted extremely naturalistically, with wounds and blood, in a crown of thorns, with his hands sagging under the weight of his body, while on the Orthodox crucifix there are no naturalistic traces of the suffering of Christ, the image of the Savior shows the victory of life over death, the Spirit over the body.

Catholics and Orthodox have many differences in the ritual part. Thus, there are obvious differences in making the sign of the cross. Orthodox are baptized from right to left, Catholics from left to right.

The norm of the Catholic cross blessing was approved in 1570 by Pope Pius V "He who blesses himself ... makes a cross from his forehead to his chest and from his left shoulder to his right."

IN Orthodox tradition the norm for performing the sign of the cross changed in terms of two-fingered and three-fingered, but they wrote about the need to be baptized from right to left church leaders before and after Nikon's reform.

Catholics usually cross themselves with all five fingers as a sign of "ulcers on the body of the Lord Jesus Christ" - two on the hands, two on the legs, one from the spear. In Orthodoxy, after the reform of Nikon, three fingers are accepted: three fingers are folded together (symbolism of the Trinity), two fingers are pressed against the palm (the two natures of Christ - divine and human. In the Romanian Church, these two fingers are interpreted as a symbol of Adam and Eve falling to the Trinity).

In addition to the obvious differences in the ritual part, in the monastic system of the two churches, in the traditions of iconography, Orthodox and Catholics have a lot of differences in terms of dogma.

Thus, the Orthodox Church does not recognize the Catholic teaching on the overdue merits of the saints, according to which the great Catholic saints, the Doctors of the Church left an inexhaustible treasury of “overdue good deeds”, so that then sinners could use the riches from it for their salvation.

The manager of the wealth from this treasury is Catholic Church and personally the Pontifex.

Depending on the zeal of the sinner, the Pontiff can take riches from the treasury and provide them to the sinful person, since a person does not have enough of his own good deeds to save him.

The concept of "excessive merit" is directly related to the concept of "indulgence", when a person is freed from punishment for his sins for the amount paid.

At the end of the 19th century, the Roman Catholic Church proclaimed the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope. According to him, when the pope (as the head of the Church) determines her doctrine concerning faith or morality, he has infallibility (infallibility) and is protected from the very possibility of error.

This doctrinal inerrancy is a gift of the Holy Spirit given to the Pope as the successor of the Apostle Peter by virtue of apostolic succession, and is not based on his personal sinlessness.

The dogma was officially proclaimed in the dogmatic constitution of Pastor Aeternus on July 18, 1870, along with the assertion of the "ordinary and immediate" authority of the jurisdiction of the pontiff in the universal Church.

The Pope used his right to proclaim a new doctrine ex cathedra only once: in 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed the dogma of the Ascension. of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The dogma of infallibility was confirmed at the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) in the dogmatic constitution of the Church Lumen Gentium.

Neither the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope nor the dogma of the Ascension of the Virgin Mary was accepted by the Orthodox Church. Also, the Orthodox Church does not recognize the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary.

The understanding of what the human soul goes through after death also differs in Orthodoxy and Catholicism. In Catholicism, there is a dogma about purgatory - a special state in which the soul of the deceased is located. Orthodoxy denies the existence of purgatory, although it recognizes the need for prayers for the dead.

In Orthodoxy, unlike Catholicism, there is a doctrine of air ordeals, obstacles through which the soul of every Christian must pass on the way to the throne of God for a private trial.

Two angels guide the soul along this path. Each of the ordeals, the number of which is 20, is controlled by demons - unclean spirits trying to take the soul going through the ordeals to hell. In the words of St. Theophan the Recluse: “No matter how wild the thought of ordeals seems to smart people, but they cannot be avoided.” The Catholic Church does not recognize the doctrine of ordeals.

The key dogmatic difference between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches is the “filioque” (lat. filioque - “and the Son”) - an addition to the Latin translation of the Creed adopted by the Western (Roman) Church in the 11th century in the dogma of the Trinity: about the procession of the Holy Spirit not only from God the Father, but "from the Father and the Son."

Pope Benedict VIII included the term "filioque" in the Creed in 1014, which caused a storm of indignation on the part of Orthodox theologians.

It was the filioque that became the “stumbling block” and caused the final division of the churches in 1054.

It was finally established at the so-called "unifying" councils - Lyons (1274) and Ferrara-Florentine (1431-1439).

In modern Catholic theology, the attitude towards the filioque, oddly enough, has changed a lot. So, on August 6, 2000, the Catholic Church published the declaration “Dominus Iesus” (“Lord Jesus”). The author of this declaration was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI).

In this document, in the second paragraph of the first part, the text of the Creed is given in the wording without the filioque: "Et in Spiritum Sanctum, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre procedit, qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur, qui locutus est per prophetas" . (“And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father, who, together with the Father and the Son, is to be worshiped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets.”)

No official, conciliar decisions followed this declaration, so the situation with the filioque remains the same.

The main difference between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church is that the head of the Orthodox Church is Jesus Christ, in Catholicism the church is headed by the vicar of Jesus Christ, its visible head (Vicarius Christi), the Pope of Rome.

The table "Comparison of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches" will help you better understand the fundamental differences when studying the history of the Middle Ages in the 6th grade, and can also be used as a review in high school.

View document content
"Table "Comparison of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches""

Table. Catholic and Orthodox Church

	Catholic Church	Orthodox Church
Name	Roman Catholic	Greek Orthodox Eastern Catholic
	Pope (pontiff)	Patriarch of Constantinople
		Constantinople
Relation to the Mother of God
Images in temples	Sculptures and frescoes
Music in the temple	Organ use
The language of worship

Table. Catholic and Orthodox Church.

How many mistakes are made? What mistakes are made?

	Catholic Church	Orthodox Church
Name	Roman Catholic	Greek Orthodox Eastern Catholic
	Pope (pontiff)	Patriarch of Constantinople
		Constantinople
	Believes that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father through the Son.	He believes that the Holy Spirit proceeds both from the Father and from the Son (filioque; lat. filioque - "and from the Son"). Eastern Rite Catholics have a different opinion on this issue.
Relation to the Mother of God	The embodiment of Beauty, Wisdom, Truth, Youth, happy motherhood	Queen of Heaven, patroness and comforter
Images in temples	Sculptures and frescoes
Music in the temple		Organ use
	Seven sacraments are accepted: baptism, chrismation, repentance, the Eucharist, marriage, priesthood, and unction. During the ceremonies, you can sit on the benches The Eucharist is celebrated on leavened bread (leavened bread); communion for the clergy and laity with the Body of Christ and His Blood (bread and wine)	Seven sacraments are accepted: baptism, chrismation, repentance, Eucharist, marriage, priesthood, anointing (unction). The Eucharist is celebrated on unleavened bread (unleavened bread made without yeast); communion for the clergy - with the Body and Blood of Christ (bread and wine), for the laity - only with the Body of Christ (bread). You can't sit during the rituals.
The language of worship	In most countries worship is in Latin	In most countries worship national languages; in Russia, as a rule, in Church Slavonic.